←back to thread

2525 points hownottowrite | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.203s | source
Show context
zwaps ◴[] No.21190952[source]
Then we have to boycott Hearthstone. While the current case is neither surprising nor substantially important, it is important because of principle.

Blizzard is not responsible for what players say in interviews. In our society, it still matters that people can tolerate other opinions.

The Chinese government tries to make it a new normal that entire people can have their "feelings hurt" (what?) by mere non-insulting opinions, and it tries to make it a new normal that all actors should censor any undesirable or potentially undesirable opinion.

If that is indeed the way, then our society and the discourse therein is no longer free, and the CCP has won.

We need to keep these firms in our mind. We need to keep a list of when this happens, and we need to sanction this as best as we can. Similarly, anyone standing up to censorship should have our support.

I can be pro HK, or I can be pro China, and I can voice opinions because doing so either way is an equally valid form of free expression. But it can not be that one side gets pre-emptively censored to appease the CCP, or any actor with the power to DEFINE the bar of what is reasonable expression of opinions.

replies(35): >>21191046 #>>21191149 #>>21191296 #>>21191337 #>>21191361 #>>21191457 #>>21191561 #>>21191609 #>>21191630 #>>21191686 #>>21191709 #>>21191715 #>>21191742 #>>21191842 #>>21191964 #>>21191971 #>>21191980 #>>21192069 #>>21192094 #>>21192118 #>>21192246 #>>21192449 #>>21192535 #>>21192785 #>>21192985 #>>21193152 #>>21193306 #>>21193442 #>>21193508 #>>21193629 #>>21193748 #>>21194032 #>>21194140 #>>21194276 #>>21194794 #
dm3730 ◴[] No.21191630[source]
> In our society, it still matters that people can tolerate other opinions.

Who is "our" in this? If you mean USA, then are you sure about your claim? Eg: "Guy chooses to kneel on the field because kids were getting shot, guy gets canned.". How is that significantly different than what is happening in this case?

replies(4): >>21191646 #>>21191667 #>>21194182 #>>21194198 #
1. shaneprrlt ◴[] No.21194182[source]
Honestly, you've changed my mind right here about the NFL issue by putting it into this perspective.

I always thought Kaepernick had the right to kneel, but that the NFL had the right to bench the player as well.

I thought the President, being a US citizen, also had the right to be raucous about the issue as many politicians were, as long as it didn't extend into actual executive action.

The reason people in the US might find this action offensive (the reason I do) is because it supports a communist government and I'm sick of US-based MNCs cow-tailing to China instead of taking a principled stand for Western values, but that should include the NFL supporting Kaepernick's right to free expression as well.

Perhaps the same reasoning can extend to so-called "cancel culture" of people getting fired for expressing their private opinions online.